To get back to the thinking - The pats are effectively now without their top 5 pass catchers from last year to start the season (assuming Hernandez is out and they don't bring back Lloyd or Branch). I believe Brady has become a QB who develops rapport with a few guys and doesn't work hard on developing the others. (Maybe part of that is that he doesn't need to.)

You gave a list of some bad players (extending over years). Let's focus on the last three or four years. Who did he ignore? There isn't a long list to choose from.

Taylor Price?

Sean Underwood?

Ochocinco?

Here are his receivers since 2009--who would you say he failed at developing?

Pro: I recommend you not bother trying to reason with UD. He's a hater and will always be one. He is among those, who profess fanship of another team, yet come on these boards constantly just to stir the pot, even though he professes that isn't his goal - it is. He cannot present a salient logical POV and when challenged resorts to the "I'm just giving my opinion, not trying to cause trouble" line. Thing is, he refuses to rationalize his opinions beyond broad-stroking trollship. Want a laugh, ask for a specific. Want another one, ask for a reliable source beyond his personal thoughts.

Brady can work with just about anyone. IMO all he cares about is winning another Super Bowl and will sacrifice stats and anything else to make the team better. They've invested draft picks and some money in improving the defense and I think we win this season. He will make it work and has enough weapons, I don't think the deep passing, air it out is Brady's game. There is nobody better at the short and intermediate game IMO . The Patriots will be fine.

Pro: I recommend you not bother trying to reason with UD. He's a hater and will always be one. He is among those, who profess fanship of another team, yet come on these boards constantly just to stir the pot, even though he professes that isn't his goal - it is. He cannot present a salient logical POV and when challenged resorts to the "I'm just giving my opinion, not trying to cause trouble" line. Thing is, he refuses to rationalize his opinions beyond broad-stroking trollship. Want a laugh, ask for a specific. Want another one, ask for a reliable source beyond his personal thoughts.

[/QUOTE]

I think much of what UD posts about Brady is motivated by his desire to "prove" Manning is better than Brady. Honestly, I think the two are both great. Seems like a silly argument to me to try to prove one is better than the other.

After the disaster that was the 2006 draft BB was in deep doo doo. Not only did 2 high draft picks on offense bust, but now the good D he inherited was evaporating before his eyes as well. Of his next 12 top 3 picks (over 4 years) he picked 10 defenders. Meriweather, Brown, Wheatley, Crable, Chung, Brace, Butler, McCourty and Cunningham were the bulk of his choices and no way was that bunch going to effectively replace the aging D he was losing largely populated courtesy of his predecessors Parcells and Carrol. And precious few high draft picks were available for the offensive skill positions during that drafting debacle.

The following year he picked a mix on both sides of the ball and the next threw nearly the whole damned thing at a D he just could not fix with the draft to save his life. This last draft he went back to trading down and picking guys that had many scratching their heads.

^^^ Calling "that" the work of the greatest GM of all time is preposterous.

After the disaster that was the 2006 draft BB was in deep doo doo. Not only did 2 high draft picks on offense bust, but now the good D he inherited was evaporating before his eyes as well. Of his next 12 top 3 picks (over 4 years) he picked 10 defenders. Meriweather, Brown, Wheatley, Crable, Chung, Brace, Butler, McCourty and Cunningham were the bulk of his choices and no way was that bunch going to effectively replace the aging D he was losing largely populated courtesy of his predecessors Parcells and Carrol. And precious few high draft picks were available for the offensive skill positions during that drafting debacle.

The following year he picked a mix on both sides of the ball and the next threw nearly the whole damned thing at a D he just could not fix with the draft to save his life. This last draft he went back to trading down and picking guys that had many scratching their heads.

^^^ Calling "that" the work of the greatest GM of all time is preposterous.

2007 The greatest team to not win a championship. The team was comprised of all Belichick players except Bruschi.

2008They would have made some noise if they had only made the playoffs.

2009A down year but they still finished 6th overall.

2010They beat both super bowl participants in the regular season.

2011They were a play or two from winning another SB.

20124th overall finish. Injuries got the best of them.

It's super bowl or bust for you. I guess some fans will never be happy.

Pro: I recommend you not bother trying to reason with UD. He's a hater and will always be one. He is among those, who profess fanship of another team, yet come on these boards constantly just to stir the pot, even though he professes that isn't his goal - it is. He cannot present a salient logical POV and when challenged resorts to the "I'm just giving my opinion, not trying to cause trouble" line. Thing is, he refuses to rationalize his opinions beyond broad-stroking trollship. Want a laugh, ask for a specific. Want another one, ask for a reliable source beyond his personal thoughts.

I think much of what UD posts about Brady is motivated by his desire to "prove" Manning is better than Brady. Honestly, I think the two are both great. Seems like a silly argument to me to try to prove one is better than the other.

Not so much. My original post was really more about current circumstances (top 5 receivers from last year likely not starting the season or gone) and past actions (the pats dispassionate removal of very talented players on the back side of their career. I realize that much of this thread has been to attack my opinion that Brady doesn't develop receivers well, but frankly that's only a small part of the whole thing.

This has very little to do with Manning except that he did develop receivers well. Brees has had success with drafted receivers. So has Rodgers, Eli, and Roethlisberger. Maybe its the pats system. Its obvious they don't covet receivers, but you'd think they could draft one that turns out. While I said, that I put a lot of it on the receiver himself, I also said it could be because Brady didn't think he needed to develop anyone else, because he had so much already. Hard to argue with Moss and Welker, and Brady (and/or the system) likes tight ends.

2008They would have made some noise if they had only made the playoffs.

2009A down year but they still finished 6th overall.

2010They beat both super bowl participants in the regular season.

2011They were a play or two from winning another SB.

20124th overall finish. Injuries got the best of them.

It's super bowl or bust for you. I guess some fans will never be happy.

I am certainly not "SB or bust", but at the same time, it's difficult to explain not winning it all very often if you believe in the Mt. Olympus address of Belichick. If he's THAT awesome, there should be better outcomes to seasons than "they beat the teams that played the SB last year" and "missed the playoffs, but if they didn't..."

I am certainly not "SB or bust", but at the same time, it's difficult to explain not winning it all very often if you believe in the Mt. Olympus address of Belichick. If he's THAT awesome, there should be better outcomes to seasons than "they beat the teams that played the SB last year" and "missed the playoffs, but if they didn't..."

Belichick is a great coach, a poor GM.

Well, if Belichick is a poor GM then so are the rest.

Ozzie Newsome Ravens2008 11-5 Lost to Steelers conference championship2009 9-7 Lost to Colts divisional round2010 12-4 Lost to Steelers divisional round2011 12-4 Lost to Patriots conference championship2012 10-6 Won SB

I am certainly not "SB or bust", but at the same time, it's difficult to explain not winning it all very often if you believe in the Mt. Olympus address of Belichick. If he's THAT awesome, there should be better outcomes to seasons than "they beat the teams that played the SB last year" and "missed the playoffs, but if they didn't..."

Belichick is a great coach, a poor GM.

Well, if Belichick is a poor GM then so are the rest.

Ozzie Newsome Ravens2008 11-5 Lost to Steelers conference championship2009 9-7 Lost to Colts divisional round2010 12-4 Lost to Steelers divisional round2011 12-4 Lost to Patriots conference championship2012 10-6 Won SB

1.) All of those teams won a Superbowl ... two if you inch back a season.

2.) BB also missed the playoffs once.

They are all good GMs -- maybe excepting Mickey Loomis in my opinion. I think he is just average: he misses a lot with some high picks.

1.) I listed the last 5 SB winners.

2. Yup, with an 11-5 record with a high school QB.

Except for the Saints win, all of the last 6 super bowls were close games. The Patriots could have won both with some breaks (all credit given to the Giants). I just can't place blame on Bill the GM for those losses.

I think Belichick compares favourably to all those other GMs. I just don't think BB is head and shoulders above them. Yes, he manages the cap very well and keeps the team consistently strong--and is maybe better at that than anyone. But he's had enough poor picks and enough trouble rebuilding certain positions that you can't say without qualitifcation that he's clearly better than the other top GMs. I contend that the Pats' talent hasn't been quite championship calibre since 2007 and that they have advanced as far as they have in seasons since then mostly because of good coaching, Brady, and a few (but not enough) impact players.

Their teams have won a super bowl or two and are typically in the playoff hunt.

That's a pretty low bar for such high praise.

"The best of the best" seems to imply abilities well above and beyond that of his contemporaries. Missing the playoffs three times in five years and having a barely winning record implies a few lucky bounces lead to a SB victory.

I think Belichick compares favourably to all those other GMs. I just don't think BB is head and shoulders above them.

That right there already puts you in the minority regardless of whether you agree with Rusty that BB is the best ever. We've got the majority of this board calling for BB to be canned. Some of it is the usual suspects, but it amazes me how many people have jumped on that bandwagon since the Hernandez investigation. I think its crazy and I imagine most fans of teams outside of NE do too.